NOOZHAWK: What experiences from your professional or personal life make you uniquely qualified to be an Assembly member?

SUSAN JORDAN: My decision to run for public office for the first time is the culmination of more than 40 years in the workforce in different capacities.

My dedication to community activism began in college and my early career was dedicated to fighting for reproductive choice and women’s rights. Later, as a senior partner in a national business research and consulting firm, I forged a strong 14-year career in the private sector. And for the past 15 years, as the founder and director of the California Coastal Protection Network, I have worked with grassroots communities up and down the state to defeat large-scale destructive and illegal projects that threaten the health and safety of neighborhoods and residents.

I believe my diverse professional and personal life experience is one of the greatest strengths that I will bring to public office. I have been a single working mother, raised a family, saved for college, and I know just how hard it is to juggle work, family and community activism. I have had a successful business career and I know what it’s like to start and manage a business and meet a payroll week after week. When I came up in the business world, the glass ceiling was a reality and not a metaphor — breaking through that ceiling taught me perseverance in the face of obstacles. My success in the private sector analyzing business problems and devising successful solutions and strategies for national and international companies is what qualifies me to craft successful strategies for California. As a chairwoman and member of the Santa Barbara County Planning Commission, I bring local government experience to the table as well, and I understand how decisions at all levels affect the lives of people in the 35th Assembly District and throughout California.

I do not fit the typical profile of most politicians running for office; at 59 years of age, I view elective office as public service and not a career. I have a proven record of standing up to special interests and taking strong stands, even if there is a political consequence to doing so. I believe my integrity and independence will enable me to make a difference in Sacramento.

NOOZHAWK: With all of California’s fiscal challenges, why are you running now?

SJ: I am running because I know we can do better, and that the residents of this district and California deserve better from the career politicians who dominate Sacramento. From my beginning as a social worker, I have worked my entire life to make this a better world to live in.

I am running now because I believe my breadth of experience, 40 years of business leadership, environmental advocacy and women’s rights activism qualifies me to address the difficult fiscal and other challenges California faces today. We desperately need legislators who understand the challenges of keeping a business afloat, who can assess the impact of regulations and taxes on our economy while holding a firm commitment to caring for the most vulnerable in our society — the elderly, the sick, the disabled and the poor.

I am also running because I am deeply concerned about the lack of women in elective office. In the Assembly, out of 80 sitting Assembly members, only 20 are women and five are termed out. In Congress, it is worse; only 17 percent of all members are women. The scarcity of women in the Legislature has a direct impact on the choices that are made on the budget and the legislation that is carried. Women need to be on an equal footing to fight for the priorities that we and our fellow Californians hold paramount.

NOOZHAWK: What is California’s most pressing issue?

SJ: The most important issue to address is the economy and job creation.

People have been hit hard during this recession and the double whammy of the housing crisis and the Wall Street meltdown have left them reeling. It seems that most if not all of the solutions that were crafted went to help Wall Street and not Main Street, and the result is a staggering unemployment rate and shuttered storefronts. People who have never sought benefits before are applying for food stamps, MediCal and unemployment insurance.

To address this issue, I believe we need to sit down, roll up our sleeves and listen to all viewpoints — including those with whom we may not always agree. This is the ONLY way we are going to dig California out of this mess.

I have met with stakeholders on all sides — those who represent business and manufacturing interests, those who are dedicated to maintaining social safety-net programs for the most vulnerable in our society, those who believe government is too big, and those who believe government is not doing enough.

And as we work to craft solutions, we have to be careful that we do not make a difficult situation worse. Balancing a budget solely through cuts to safety-net programs and education is shortsighted. For every program cut, a job is lost and a vulnerable population is shifted to more expensive alternatives. Cuts to higher education mean that we are cheating California out of a skilled workforce in the future. Overburdening business means that the backbone of our economy — 93 percent of all businesses in California are small businesses — will make recovery and getting people back to work even more difficult.

One of the first things we need to consider is re-instituting an Economic Development Agency where the director serves as a member of the (governor’s) Cabinet. We need an agency that focuses solely on bringing and maintaining business in California.

We also need to look at the creation of a revolving loan fund to help small and midsize businesses weather the recession. Tight credit markets where banks are refusing to loan money to smaller businesses, where equity lines are being closed, and where credit-card interest rates are being unilaterally increased have significantly worsened California’s chances for recovery. We need to correct this situation as quickly as possible.

Tax credits for manufacturing and new hires can also help jump-start the economy. And closing unnecessary corporate tax loopholes that benefit just a few large corporations but do not create jobs have to be rescinded.

Finally, we have to make sure that the budget gets done on time, and it is already late … again. Every day the budget is late is another dollar out the door, another shovel-ready project delayed.

I am deeply committed to supporting job creation in our state because I believe that a vibrant economy brings prosperity to many and allows us to provide high-quality affordable education to our children and enables us to care for the most vulnerable in our society who deserve to be treated with dignity and respect.

NOOZHAWK: Is the partisan divide in Sacramento insurmountable? How would you overcome it?

SJ: I am not a career politician and I don’t believe in adhering to the party line when there are solutions that need to be crafted. To bridge this divide, we need to elect more representatives who will think and act in an independent fashion and not be directed by the special interests that fund their campaigns.

I have decades of experience fighting for what I believe is right — and this transcends partisan politics. I have successfully worked with people on both sides of the political aisle to devise policies on the environment and energy — because I always keep foremost in mind — what’s best for the people.

During my tenure on the county Planning Commission, I proved I could listen to all sides and make fair and balanced decisions.

However, on matters of key principles and values, I am not afraid to stand my ground and do what is right even when I am under extraordinary pressure to do otherwise — even from my own political party.

NOOZHAWK: Many financial experts call California’s state government employee pension levels unsustainable. Do you agree? How would you resolve the situation?

SJ: I don’t think there is any one answer to this question and I believe the response to the pension issue has been over-simplified and over-politicized with little reasonable discourse in the middle.

Hard-working people who made choices years ago to sacrifice Social Security benefits and salary advancement for some certainty in their retirement are not the problem here. Most government employees’ pensions are modest, with a median in the $30,000-a-year range.

I would like to see the whole tenor of the discussion changed and an independent analysis that is devoid of party politics and that carefully and methodically parses through the issue put in place.

It is always important to keep an open mind on where a problem exists and what the individual, carefully crafted solutions might be.

The first problem I think needs to be tackled immediately is the corruption within the CalPERS system itself and the lack of regulatory control over “placement agents” who steer CalPERS to investments, seal deals to invest billions dollars of CalPERS funds, and reap unconscionable and exorbitant fees in exchange. One such placement agent, Alfred A. Villalobos, a former CalPERS board member, received more than $47 million in fees for acting as a go-between for investment firms looking to do business with CalPERS. The state Attorney General’s Office has filed a lawsuit alleging that Villalobos improperly provided gifts and gratuities to pension fund officials in the case.

Legislation that would require placement agents to be registered as lobbyists and would prohibit them from receiving commissions based on the total amount of the investment deals they work on is under consideration in the Legislature right now.

NOOZHAWK: What three things should Sacramento do to get California’s economy moving? If you’re elected, how will you help implement them?

SJ: I addressed this in a previous question about the most pressing issue California faces, but to reiterate:

» Re-institute an Economic Development Agency with the head as a Cabinet-level position. We used to have one but it was eliminated by Gov. Gray Davis. State Sen. Mark DeSaulnier, D-Concord, is carrying legislation to authorize this.

» Establish a revolving loan fund to help out small and midsize businesses. The California Manufacturers & Technology Association is working with state Treasurer Bill Lockyer to set up such a structure.

» Expand investment incentives, including a manufacturing investment tax credit with a 10-year sunset to help jump-start things. Also, a tax credit for companies that hire new employees. Any tax credit should be geared to real job creation or retention, or cost savings through energy/conservation, and new equipment that can reduce costs without displacing workers.

NOOZHAWK: Do you support offshore oil drilling in California? Why or why not?

SJ: I have been a consistent opponent to the expansion of offshore oil drilling in California.

The tragic accident in the Gulf of Mexico highlights just how vulnerable our local coastal communities would be to another oil spill. Our ocean is at the heart of much of our local economy — from tourism, to fishing, to our wonderful quality of life and retirement ambiance. Even Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has seen the economic devastation that an offshore oil-drilling accident can cause and has withdrawn his prior support for the controversial PXP project.

I am the only Assembly candidate who has consistently opposed new offshore oil drilling — both the PXP proposal to drill the first new offshore oil lease in state waters in more than 40 years, Venoco’s Paredon voter initiative in Carpinteria, which overrides the legitimate jurisdiction of the City Council to approve or deny a project, and the expansion of oil drilling off Goleta.

My opponent in the Democratic primary supports the PXP proposal — and continues to do so even in light of the Gulf oil disaster. He has said my opposition to it is the major reason he decided to run against me after he had publicly stated that he was supporting me.

I opposed the PXP project because I do not believe the end dates that are being cited to justify greatly expanded drilling are legally enforceable — an opinion that was confirmed by the State Lands Commission and the state Attorney General’s Office. I also believe that approval of the first new offshore oil lease in state waters in 40 years would reverse longstanding California environmental policy and set a precedent for new federal and state offshore oil leasing. This concern has been confirmed by pending legislation by Assemblyman Chuck DeVore, R-Irvine, that would open up the entire California coastline to new drilling in state waters and offer discounted royalty rates to oil companies that pay up front for new leases. Further, the Parsky Tax Commission Report also recommended opening up the entire coastline to new drilling to generate revenues for the budget. In Sacramento, the PXP proposal was used to justify both of these proposals.

Should California decide to reverse its longstanding policy against new drilling in state waters, I believe that such a major decision should be evaluated through a coherent and orderly public process with stakeholder input and debate. Should the ultimate decision be to authorize new drilling, I believe any new leases should be put up for competitive bidding and that safeguards that cover liability for businesses and communities that are likely to suffer damage from an oil spill be put in place. In the Gulf right now, BP is only responsible for covering the cost of the cleanup. There is a $75 million cap on damages to businesses and homeowners that will not nearly cover the devastation to hard-working communities that this spill is going to create.

For more, visit Noozhawk

The Plains Exploration and Production Co. and its environmental supporters in Santa Barbara had hoped that a revised agreement, under which the company pledges a long-term cessation of all oil activities in the area in exchange for short-term permission to tap into state reserves, would lead state regulators to remove their opposition.

But in a memo to commissioners on Tuesday, Executive Director Paul Thayer concluded, “The new agreement does not cure the factors that led the commission to determine the proposed leases were not in the best interests of the state.”

That opinion, coming on the heels of Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s decision earlier this month to abandon his support for the Tranquillon Ridge project, makes it unlikely the company will ask the commission to reconsider its January 2009 decision to reject the project.

“I really think this is the final nail,” said Susan Jordan, founder of the nonprofit Coastal Protection Network and a leading opponent of the plan. “Given the staff’s very thorough analysis, I don’t know how PXP moves forward at this point.”

For more

Since the Earth Day oil rig explosion that killed 11 people and unleashed an unimaginable disaster in the Gulf of Mexico, the unacceptable risks of offshore oil drilling have been in the news daily.

Politicians, including Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, are backpedaling from their prior support, based on the horrifying images on the nightly news.

Given how close we’ve come to expanding offshore oil drilling off Santa Barbara (a proposal that now appears almost certainly dead), it’s useful to look back at how that proposal played out.

The PXP deal is a proposal to allow Houston-based Plains Exploration & Production Co. to expand its drilling operation off the Santa Barbara County coast in exchange for a permanent halt to drilling and exploration beginning in 2022.

I was the Sierra Club representative in Sacramento dealing with this proposal when it first came to light, so I saw exactly how this unfolded.

When the proposal to drill new wells from Platform Irene was first proposed by PXP, the Environmental Defense Center (EDC) did an impressive job of convincing and cajoling other organizations to support the deal, notwithstanding the fact that all the details were contained in a secret contract between EDC and PXP. Many organizations were willing to follow EDC’s lead, based on its years of impressive environmental work. Given that the details of the deal weren’t available for review, there was a heavy emphasis on “just trust us.”

The initial push by EDC and PXP to sell the deal came just after Susan Jordan had declared her candidacy for Assembly. As director of the California Coastal Protection Network and a detail-oriented person, Ms. Jordan wasn’t going to simply take someone else’s claim that supporting the first new offshore oil drilling in California in 40 years was a good idea. She dug into the available documents at a far greater level of detail than anyone else had.

What she found is now old news: the deal was not as enforceable as had been claimed (an observation validated by the Attorney General, the State Lands Commission, and the Mineral Management Service). And despite the supposed benefit of creating an end date for oil extraction, the project significantly increases the risk of an oil spill disaster in the short term.

Let’s be perfectly clear about the risks at the heart of this deal. When you set aside the various bells and whistles of land transfers and carbon offsets and such, at its core the benefit from PXP’s perspective is that they could drill more wells now, extract more oil faster, then get out. Drill more, faster, now. But, as the State Lands Commission found when it rejected this proposal last year, drilling more wells to accelerate oil extraction increases the risk of a disaster.

Having established that the proposed deal would increase the risk of an oil spill, and was not as enforceable as claimed, Ms. Jordan was in a tough spot. She has had a friend at the EDC for years, and opposing the deal was going to be personally difficult. Further, local politics were such that supporting the deal, or staying silent, would have been the safe thing to do. How Ms. Jordan handled this situation tells us lots about what kind of leader she will be in Sacramento.

Despite the political risks, and the difficulty of opposing a long-time friend’s proposal, Ms. Jordan made her decision based on the facts and what was right. She was clear about her position and explained the facts that led her there. And she stuck with it, even though she paid a heavy political price.

Her primary opponent, Das Williams, stated publicly that he jumped into the state Assembly race because of the issue, apparently perceiving an opportunity to exploit divisions in the environmental community.

Much has been said about the PXP/EDC deal over the past couple years, and it has become a significant election issue. I believe that looking at how Ms. Jordan handled this exceedingly difficult issue tells us a lot about her commitment to doing what is right, even when it is personally and politically difficult. She demonstrated exactly the combination of guts, integrity and leadership that we need in Sacramento during these difficult times.

The difference between Ms. Jordan’s response to this deal and that of her opponent is the difference between being a leader or a follower. Given the challenges facing California right now, I think we need a leader.

The author is a former deputy director of Sierra Club California.

05/06/2010

There’s an old adage that if we don’t learn from our mistakes, we are destined to repeat them. When it comes to offshore oil drilling or oil usage in general, one can’t help but wonder how many more oil spills it will take before we decide oil drilling is bad and that our co-dependence on oil simply isn’t sustainable. With the burgeoning oil spill crisis in the Gulf of Mexico, we must look back in time and remember that this isn’t our first time at bat.

In 1969, Union Oil Platform A, stationed six miles off the coast of Santa Barbara, suffered a blowout and released between 80,000 and 100,000 barrels of oil into the ocean, killing dolphins, seals and more than 10,000 birds.

In 1989, the Exxon Valdez oil tanker grounded, spilling 250,000 barrels of crude oil in Alaska’s Prince William Sound, killing an estimated 100,000 to as many as 250,000 birds, 2,800 sea otters, 300 harbor seals, 247 bald eagles and 22 orcas, as well as causing the destruction of billions of salmon and herring eggs. The Exxon spill severely damaged the coastline, and researchers estimate it could take another 10 years to approach restoring it to its previous condition.

As of today, the Transocean Deepwater Horizon oil rig spill is estimated to have leaked 75,000 barrels of oil to date, and with no sure way to cap the leak, is adding 5,000 barrels a day into the Gulf of Mexico. Even without hitting the coastline, experts are saying it would rank among the worst ecological disasters in U.S. history.

At this point, the idea of proposing any new drilling anywhere seems ludicrous. Even the Obama administration is backtracking on the president’s proposal for new offshore drilling.

Although California has never experienced a severe disaster such as that which is destined for the Mississippi Delta or what happened to Alaska’s serene coastline, it certainly doesn’t mean we should take our chances. But that isn’t stopping Santa Barbara’s Environmental Defense Center, which has agreed to a controversial plan with oil company Plains Exploration and Production Company (PXP) that will allow for new drilling in California’s waters for the first time since the spill of 1969.

Although the plan, which the center’s attorney says is enforceable, would result in the decommissioning and dismantling of the four most active platforms off the county’s coast over the course of the next 14 years, the risk factors and loopholes of the plan are not worth the energy, literally.

First, the four platforms listed in the proposal already have a finite life, according to a Santa Barbara environmental impact report on the PXP project. That report states that California’s Marine Minerals Service estimated that the oil will dry up and all of the platforms could be removed by 2025.

Second, new drilling means more oil being pumped and an increased risk of an oil spill. The devastating effects of the last three major oil spills should be enough to stop any mulling over the idea of new drilling.

Third, even if the plan is enforceable through legal channels, all PXP will have to do is pay for damages for breach of contract as it continues to drill. And as Coastal Commissioner Sara Wan pointed out, California officials could change their minds in 14 years and support more drilling. This would be the antithesis of the intentions of the proposal and the defense center’s clients, Get Oil Out! and Citizen’s Planning Association of Santa Barbara.

In addition to the problems associated with this plan, in the end, support for it and its passage would mean condoning continued dependence on oil, the root of the problem. If we are drilling, then we aren’t investing in alternative energy sources, and that is problematic.

We think the EDC/PXP proposal is a bad one; and now, even Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger agrees. It appears that it won’t be approved by the State Lands Commission, but even this plan’s failure doesn’t equate to success. Until we have fully embraced wind, solar, wave and every other type of energy source, we can continue to expect devastating oil spills and many other problems associated with the true cost of oil.

]]> http://jordan4assembly.com/2010/05/more-drilling-is-not-the-answer-vc-reporter/feed/ 0 http://jordan4assembly.com/2010/04/organic-soup-company-expanding/ http://jordan4assembly.com/2010/04/organic-soup-company-expanding/#comments Wed, 07 Apr 2010 19:19:17 +0000 admin http://www.jordan4assembly.org/?p=1071 Organic Soup Kitchen of Santa Barbara, California held its first annual Easter Feast at the Veterans Memorial Building on Sunday from 8am to 4pm.

During the event, Founder and Executive Director, Anthony Carroccio, announced “Starting June 1, we’ll be expanding our community outreach program to provide daily meals to individuals and families in need at different locations throughout the city.”

It has been a vision of Organic Soup Kitchen to launch a mobile unit into the community to reach not only the homeless, but many other individuals and families who are struggling in the poor economy.

On Sunday, Organic Soup Kitchen received the support of more than 70 volunteers from Santa Barbara and surrounding areas, and local businesses such as Peet’s Coffee and Whole Foods Market.

A steady stream of guests arrived throughout the day to enjoy a hot, healthy meal. Breakfast included hot coffee, tea, breakfast burritos, & assorted breads. Dinner included chicken picatta, roasted potatoes, baked ziti, vegetables, and various desserts. Community building, games, and gifts were free flowing, and live music during the dinner session included the Peruvian band Pasambara.

Several public officials arrived to help serve food and enjoy the festivities; among them Assemblyman Pedro Nava, Santa Barbara County Planning Commission Chair and State Assembly Candidate Susan Jordan, and Carpinteria councilmember Kathleen Reddington.

For more…

http://www.nickandpaulshow.com/show/03-23-10.mp3

LOS ANGELES — Nearly two years ago, a broad coalition of environmental groups celebrated a deal with a Texas oil company that promised to eventually end its drilling operations off California’s scenic Santa Barbara County coast.

Now, a growing number of those former eco allies are lining up against the plan, in part because no one outside a small circle of supporters was allowed to read the final agreement.

Many also wonder if the 2022 end date for drilling is enforceable and worry the deal with Plains Exploration & Production, known as PXP, could inadvertently end a 40-year moratorium on new offshore drilling along the entire California coast.

About 110 groups have joined the “Oppose PXP Coalition.” Among its members is the Sierra Club, which initially endorsed the deal and was still listed as a supporter on the PXP Web site long after the group changed its position. The company has used the roster of environmental backers to win public support for the proposal.

“It’s very frustrating,” said Michael Endicott of the Sierra Club. “I asked them to do it last year. Stop saying Sierra Club is in support of the project – we’re not.”  For more…

Back when pols still wore fedoras, oil companies wanting in on state lands off the coast of California had no need to bother with the mess of legal, political, and regulatory barriers confronting them today.

All they had to do was head for Sacramento to “go see Rosie.”

More formally known to California historians as Joe Rosenthal, Rosie was the chief political consultant and fixer for the late governor Frank Merriam, whose administration was consumed by a scandal involving state oil drilling leases in 1938. As recounted in Crude Politics, a history of California oil policy (tinyurl.com/lmc2gp), the governor’s “go see Rosie” policy led to a scandal that transformed much of the structure of state government. One big change was that the governor lost power over the awarding of lucrative energy leases, in favor of a newly created State Lands Commission.

The historic vignette came to mind this week as the Legislature and Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger returned to the Capitol to face anew the state’s chronic budget deficit, a seemingly intractable issue that once again will push to center stage the fight over oil drilling off the coast of Santa Barbara.

The governor is expected to resume his push to generate hundreds of millions of dollars in new revenue, in exchange for granting the Houston-based PXP energy company a lease to drill in state waters off the coast near Lompoc. His latest effort will mark the third major battle within a year over the much-chronicled Tranquillon Ridge/PXP project. On a 2-1 vote, the aforementioned Lands Commission early last year defeated it, a verdict upheld by the Legislature during an epic budget battle a few months later.

Now, the Terminator, still facing a recession-ravaged state treasury, is back.

The latest conflict is certain to generate a new round of recriminations and internal feuding among environmentalists, who are split as to the merits of the drilling proposal. Led by the Environmental Defense Center, which negotiated an agreement with PXP to end drilling in federal waters off Santa Barbara in exchange for the 14-year state lease, some advocates view the T-Ridge plan as the best bet to begin to phase out offshore drilling permanently. As a matter of political process, they believe the project should be revisited by the Lands Commission, not muscled through the Legislature by the governor. However, their backing for the overall plan infuriates many other environmental groups, including the Sierra Club, which worked hard to kill the measure in last year’s budget fight.

When hostilities over the matter resume, some Santa Barbara political leaders will play key roles:

• City Councilmember Das Williams, who is seeking the Democratic nomination for the 35th Assembly District seat, has supported the PXP plan. He has said he entered the race specifically because of that issue-in order to challenge coastal advocate Susan Jordan-who fiercely opposes the project. The governor’s effort to end-run the Lands Commission complicates the politics of the matter, and it will be significant to see how Williams handles the issue with Jordan in his face.

• Assemblymember Pedro Nava, whose term limit-driven retirement from the 35th District set the stage for the Williams-Jordan contest, successfully led and rallied the legislative opposition that killed the PXP plan last year. Nava, who is married to Jordan, is now running in the Democratic race for Attorney General, and his high-profile anti-drilling stance is a key part of his political pitch.

• State Senator Abel Maldonado (R-Santa Maria) recently was nominated by Schwarzenegger to be lieutenant governor, replacing Democrat John Garamendi. Before winning a special election for Congress, Garamendi as lieutenant governor cast the decisive vote against the T-Ridge plan on the State Lands Commission. Maldonado voted against the project in the Senate last year; as the governor’s man, however, he would come under pressure to switch his position, if he is confirmed as lieutenant governor and if the project comes back before the commission.

“While he demonstrated good judgment one time,” Nava, who gets a vote on Maldonado’s nomination, said of the GOP’s senator’s anti-PXP vote, “we’re going to need to know a lot more about his positions on ocean protection, state lands, and other public trust issues. This is not a simple position.”

Episode 041… Susan Jordan for State Assembly from David Pritchett on Vimeo.

Former State Sen. Sheila Kuehl and former Supt. of Public Instruction Delaine Eastin were the featured speakers at a fundraiser for Susan Jordan hosted by Democratic activist Betty Stephens on Nov. 14. Video includes extended speech by Susan.

Many thanks to David Pritchett and Cathy Murillo, who co-produce Off-Leash Public Affairs.

With the release of the jobs report on Friday, the broadest measure of unemployment and underemployment tracked by the Labor Department has reached its highest level in decades. If statistics went back so far, the measure would almost certainly be at its highest level since the Great Depression.

In all, more than one out of every six workers — 17.5 percent — were unemployed or underemployed in October. The previous recorded high was 17.1 percent, in December 1982. For more